Skip to main content

About your Search

WHUT (Howard University Television) 4
English 36
Search Results 0 to 37 of about 38 (some duplicates have been removed)
again during his time in office. >> presidents also touched on foreign policy, praising u.s. soldiers stationed in afghanistan and promising them a speedy return home. >> the president of the united states. [applause] >> it is a washington ritual, long applause, handshakes, and hugs on both sides of the aisle. in his speech, obama focused clearly on domestic issues, among them, raising the minimum wage, reforming immigration, and modernizing the education system. he also address america's political third rail -- gun control. the president promised survivors of gun control violence he would pursue common-sense reform. in a short foreign policy segment of his speech, obama said that efforts were on the course to conclude afghan operations next year. turning to europe, he raised the prospect of a free-trade zone to encourage commerce with european union countries and believe fears his new asian focus would come at europe's expense -- the late -- belay fears. >> trade that is fair and free across the atlantic supports millions of good-paying american jobs. >> but in a bitterly divided was
as predi predictable as the speech itself. aaron david miller, you know, there was no foreign policy this week, and he called mr. obama the extricater in chief, a praise i rather liked, but other than that, i really found the commentary westbound quite dreary about a quite uninspiring and effective speech. >> the point is most liberal like these things. there's nothing in this particularly liberal. and it's gotten to the point that if you're a liberal you have to like every idea that barack obama has. and since 1980, i don't understand, like, why are-- the economy is turning around now and he wants to talk about raising the minimum wage? i mean, it just isn't-- this is not an inspiring reaction to what's going on. >> jon: cal. >> i wrote in a column this week, a higher authority to. and the president, the recycling old ideas. the guys are so deep in the tank with this guy if he came up they'd suffer from the bends. he didn't call the president a liar, but came close to it said all of his claims were fantastic. he mentioned head start. he wants pre-k, 3 to 4, and head start has been s
swayinger right now and a lot of confidence. and forepolicy, he's kind of outsourced foreign policy in the first term. he's insourcing it back in the whitehouse again. this is his foreign policy and he's running into controversy over the drone program right now. this is a foreign policy national security team that is much more implementers and not super stars in their own right. barack obama has got ownership. he doesn't seem to support the kind of cast he had four years ago. >> rose: mark halperin when you looked at the possibilities of dealing with republicans especially the sequester question, is there some sense that the administration kneeling confident has pulled it off? >> i'm more pessimistic about it than i've been since probably the president took office. these other issues -- >> rose: since he was re-elected. >> no, since he took office. put these other issues on the table. gun control and climate change. i don't think there's any chance of those move until and unless he gets a fiscal deal in part because the traffic won't bear other big big things. and also because i d
afghanistan is part of foreign policy but on the other hand, troop withdrawal is controversial issue and in afghanistan there's concern of what is going to happen with the pursuing of the peace process. there's hopes and concerns as well. i want to be part of hope for my country. i know there are challenges and one day i might be assassinated but it's a choice i made for myself. >> jon: inspiring one and incredibly brave one. enough time we'll good to commercial and we'll talk more about the complexities ant dueality of living in afghanistan and the difficulty as you go through there. very, very nice to have you on the show. fawzia koofi, "the favored daughter." you she had gut this and readit it
and unemployment, he is completely wrong or during the hearings when he was talking about foreign policy. he sounded like he had no idea how these things actually work even though the words sounded very lovely all mixed together like that. >> rick, i think part of that maybe perhaps is that you can't actually tie yourself to specific policy in the current republican party. i mean, the thing about -- the difference between barack obama and hillary clinton is that they really weren't that far apart in terms of actual policy. there were a few measurable differences that were -- a lot of hay was made out of them, but fundamentally it wasn't that the democratic party was going through the same sort of, you know, analysis on the couch that the republican party is. >> the point is the strategy on how each one of them sort of had this crescendo in their popularity. it wasn't -- i'm not speaking to the two, but when hillary was first in the senate, she was very careful and methodical about how she rolled herself out. same thing with barack obama. knew that he came in as a big star, but knew that he n
a speech done now for days to react to the events of overnight? >> usually they have a foreign policy section and i think they'll add it. and, you know, usually they find a way to work in foreign policy and go in that section and it's -- you know, these speeches are, you know, the structure of them is done a long time in advance but they'll still being worked on until the last minute. >> absolutely. and also, we know through the latest developments today, the president will announce 34,000 troops leaving afghanistan, as well. another part of the puzzle if you will of us learning when's in that speech. what i'm curious about your opinion on, our first read team says there are three economic questions that the president will perhaps answer tonight. one of them is how can the united states create more jobs at home. when the speech outline is happening, are you guys talking about these are the questions people are asking at home. mr. president, this is how to answer. is it that kind of set-up? >> well, you know, usually you start out i think by, you know, the president and his speechwrite
of the obama administration's foreign policy agenda. on the fringe of the senate. you are talking about a person whose voting record shows softness on iran and antagonism toward israel beyond belief. he'd be the most antagonistic senator toward the state of israel in history, so the fact that we reported in -- tuesday, wanted a cloture vote thursday was unreasonable and we voted senator kerry on the same day because there was no controversy and offer to the white house to hold the vote until after the break, and, if nothing new came out we'd vote for cloture, senator john mccain and myself, but that wasn't good enough and they wanted to force the issue so i'm glad that we have got more time to look and i'm glad he answered my question, about a very disturbing comment he allegedly made. so i think we're doing our job to scrutinize, i think, one of the most unqualified, radical choices for secretary of defense in a very long time. >> chris: well, let me ask you a question about that. if he is so radical and unqualified, if you get the information you are seeking on him, and on benghazi, w
, had choice words for the president's foreign policy team. i'm not sure i agree with that. in "the new york times," a great must-read, quietly killing a consumer watchdog. it's how the republicans are just doing everything they can not to have the consumer financial protection bureau that was created by elizabeth warren under president obama actually function because it would keep them, quite frankly, from being able to get their money from all their donors on wall street. and they do not want to lose the people who helped them out. so they want to make sure that the consumer suffers so that they can gain politically. it's a good one. take a look at it. coming up -- >> we're also going to talk about nancy pelosi saying we don't have a spending problem, and the problem with medicare is not medicare. we've got a lot to talk about straight ahead. >> gail collins of "the new york times" joins us straight ahead. >> she's got a great column. >> i love it. you're watching "morning joe" brewed by starbucks. humans. even when we cross our t's and dot our i's, we still run into problems. namely,
were skeptical to the approach of foreign policy but chuck hagel and bill cohen were could not be further apart and the administration miscalculated. >> i don't think they did their homework. they didn't check out the fact he's not well-liked. personally not well-liked. i talked to senator imhoff who has issues with his policy on israel and iran. mccain said he may vote against him but thought he might pass. then lindsay graham. those are strong conservative republicans and they're not buying it. let me tell you one thing, at the end of the day, if what the republicans want is an ineffective secretary of defense, why? they're not going to agree with obama's policies. ettes far better to have a weak secretary of defense than a strong one who shoves the president's policies down. >> neil: that might be the choice we're left with. kt, always good seeing you. >> thanks, neil. >> from gold to gone, a a meddle winner charged with murdering his girlfriend. ma anyone gunshot. "make seone y >> ma mendez and the media. we question, you decide. one som♪ ♪and you will be happy too.
political thought when it comes to foreign policy. i think that's fair too. so i think that's what the senate is supposed to do. they're supposed to advise and consent. i think john mccain is doing it exactly like he should do it. he has problems with it, but he's going to let the president put his person in charge. i thought mccain was very fair there. mark? you take some of the things he said in the past, they're pretty bad, but he circled back. he's talked to lindsey. he's assured some other people that those are not his positions today. >> senator hagel has really big shoes to fill. the president's first two defense secretaries, fantastic. worked well with the hill, worked well with the pentagon. i think senator mccain, unlike some of the other critics that chuck hagel, has focused on the things where there really are questions. >> and by the way, again, i support chuck hagel. but they're very legitimate questions. we have to sort out some of the hyperbolic attacks, which are just shameful, versus responsible concerns. john mccain, i felt, was really responsible yesterday, took
is it that we can do to seek common ground? >> so many in the u.s. on this new foreign policy team obviously we already have the confirmation of john kerry. let me switch gears a little bit and ask you about chuck hagel as somebody who was in the cabinet and who knows what the confirmation process is like. what do you make of how this has been going? >> this is incredible. i was confirmed by the senate twice as u.n. ambassador, secretary of energy, and usually here is the differences. national security team, secretary of state or defense, are generally confirmed without any opposition. this has been a tradition with presidents. in the hagel case, look, it is important the question on policy and i know senator hagel was questioned on israel, on iran. i think that's legitimate, but some senators went as far as getting personal and not just personal but unsubstantiated charges on the floor of the senate in hearings. that's never happened. i think that's a function of a tea party that is still a major player within the republican party circles and i don't think the republican's strategy is to stop
was a lovely president. host: what did you think of ronald reagan's foreign policy? caller: he had a good foreign policy. the increased our navy, our air force. that's how he defeated the soviet union. nobody ever did that. host: june 12, 1987, ronald reagan, in a speech to the people of west berlin about communism. [video clip] >> we welcome change and openness, but we believe freedom and security go together, that the in advance of human liberty can only strengthen the cause of world peace. there's one sign the soviets can make that would be unmistakable, that would advance drastically the cause of freedom and peace. general secretary gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the soviet union, come to this gate. mr. gorbachev, open this gate. [cheers and applause] mr. gorbachev, tear down this wall. host: president ronald reagan. we have done a lot on the american presidents, house, and even those who did not make it to the presidency with our series "the contenders" last year. go to the archives are our website, the video library at c- if you're interest
was dismissive, on climate change, which was dismissive. i think there were two sentences on foreign policy. i think you have to say more about the position of the united states and the world. >> the middle east is in flames right now. you should probably talk about it. >> you have to be self-aware. and i think of chris christie, who i believe, unless i remember incorrectly, turned it down. >> he's a smart man, chris christie, and he's in the 70s. >> he turned this one down? >> not this one. >> i have a question that perhaps john heilemann can answer. marco rubio's a smart guy, an attractive guy, an articulate guy with a terrific life story. why is it that in an age in the past few months when the republicans have been talking about broadening the base of the party, speaking to a larger audience, why is it that he spent so much time last night seemingly preaching to the choir rather than talking to the country? >> that's a good point. >> well, you know, mike, i think he points out the awkward intraparty politics that the republicans now face. you know, you have a party that does need to broade
by the hillary clinton president for. 3:00 a.m. every president faces a foreign policy crisis. do you want this man, senator barack obama answering that phone call at 3:00 a.m.? well, it turns out, suddenly a relevant question. >> suddenly a relevant question because on the afternoon of september 11th, 2012, of course the day of the benghazi attacks that unfolded, there was some question now at least being raised by republican congressman louie gohmert as to why -- how responsive was the president during this entire time? well, we know in the afternoon he did speak with his. >> leon panetta and general demps is i. >> 5:00 p.m. in the afternoon. louie gohmert raising this point 3:00 a.m. and whether or not he was able to sleep through all of these unfolding problems in benghazi, listen. >> president required a sleep aid that night but if he did, anybody else in america has trouble sleeping, you better get what he had because it works well. how the president of the united states could sleep that night as the ambassador that he put in place, that he put in harm's way was under attack or he ha
the answer, i don't know. i don't develop the programs, i don't develop policy, i don't do foreign policy or military policy or military objectives. once congress and the executive branch decide what the policy or program is, then we see how well it's done and if there are problems, we make recommendations. going back to the taxation issue, it's a critical issue. now the afghan government, what they collect is about $2 billion per year. just paying for the afghan national security force is over $4 billion. then all the other programs. the problem is there's a delta between what the afghans collect and it cost of running their government, the cost of fighting the taliban, the cost of maintaining order. that difference is being supported by the united states taxpayer and by our allies. but it is conditioned. the caller and others have some concerns about how well that is being spent. that is the value. a lot of discussion came out of the tokyo accords about the international community will not walk, but they're trying to put conditions on the ability of the afghan government to govern and t
certainly want better trade policies. i want more support and subsidies for american manufacturers rather than for foreign manufacturers but you can make sure the federal government is being a good steward of taxpayer dollars and using them to buy for from americans rather than foreign companies. host: 1 last tweet -- guest: you will never stop everyone from buying an illegal gun. that is always the case with laws we pass. if you want laws the one that% air tight, we should not pass anything. we're trying to cut down on the number of illegal sales oe
Search Results 0 to 37 of about 38 (some duplicates have been removed)